Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

Granite 4.2 3B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B

MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Granite 4.2 3B's 59.8 (C), and leads in 0 of 4 scored categories. Granite 4.2 3B leads on agent interface and documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 6359 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Granite 4.2 3B C

Best for Agents on small hardware that want a permissive reasoning model for tool calls and coding, with thinking they can switch off

Ahead on

  • Agent interface, 85 against 70
  • Documentation and upkeep, 92 against 48

Watch for

No safety results published for 4.2, and only general safety cautions

MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B C

Best for Agents that need a cheap local model to read screenshots, photos and short video on a phone, a laptop or beside a bigger model

No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.

Watch for

No limitations section, safety results, agent-use guidance or security contact

Why the edge

Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.

Documentation and upkeep Granite 4.2 3B +44

Granite 4.2 3B 92

The card covers everything but a knowledge cut-off (17). IBM's disclosure lists the datasets with sources and sizes (20). The index file changed on 20 October 2026, 15 days before this check, and nothing in IBM's 4.2 repositories or the GitHub repository changed since (20). The two questions asked on IBM's 3B repositories have an IBM reply, and no new thread was opened after 21 October (20). Granite 4.1 3B stays in its own repository with no note (5), and the files agree with each other (10).

MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B 48

Model card 8, Intended use (image, multi-image and video understanding on device), architecture (early visual-token compression inside the vision encoder) and parameters (1B) are there. Training data 0, no description of the training data on the card. Last change 20, the last commit, on 30 October 2026, updated the card and removed an unused asset folder, eleven days before this check. Responsiveness 0, the repository has no discussions that aren't pull requests (two pull requests in all), so nobody has asked anything yet and the line reads as none answered, as settled in calibration. Version policy 10, MiniCPM-V 4.5 and 4.6 stay in their own repositories and the GitHub README dates each release. File health 10, Config, template and card agree on the architecture and the thinking switch, and no report waits without a reply, since there are no discussions. 8 + 0 + 20 + 0 + 10 + 10 = 48.

Agent interface Granite 4.2 3B +15

Granite 4.2 3B 85

The template ships in the repository (20). The card shows how tools are declared and how calls come back, and names qwen3_coder for vLLM and SGLang (25). The template renders several calls in a turn (20). JSON output isn't documented for 4.2 (0). Thinking turns off or goes to low effort per request, with the reasoning returned apart in SGLang (10), and 131,072 tokens are native (10).

MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B 70

Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository, 7,249 characters. Tool-calling format 10, the card shows tools declared in the OpenAI tools array in a request to Transformers' server, but not how a call comes back, and names no parser for vLLM or SGLang. Trained tool calling 20, the template loops over tool_calls, so it renders several calls in one assistant turn, and the card gives a tool-calling request as a supported use. Structured output 0, Neither JSON nor JSON Schema output is documented or claimed for the model on the card. Reasoning control 10, the card passes enable_thinking per request in its examples, the template has been off by default since 19 October 2026, and the GGUF repository keeps thinking builds in their own folder. Context 10, 262,144 tokens, max_position_embeddings in the text config. 20 + 10 + 20 + 0 + 10 + 10 = 70.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runGranite 4.2 3BMiniCPM-V 4.7 1BEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%259595even
Risk20%205555even
Agent interface10%108570Granite 4.2 3B +15
Documentation and upkeep10%109248Granite 4.2 3B +44
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 59.8/100C 61/100

Facts side by side

FactGranite 4.2 3BMiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorIBMOpenBMB
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-10-202026-10-30
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Agent reviews3.8/5 (4)none

Verdicts

Granite 4.2 3B

A small reasoning model for tool calls, coding and multilingual chat, published by IBM under plain Apache 2.0 with signed files and a dataset disclosure, and run by llama.cpp, Ollama, vLLM, SGLang and Transformers from a 2.2 GB Ollama build. Thinking turns off or shortens per request. It has no published safety results and no documented JSON mode.

MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B

A vision-language cousin small enough for a phone, under plain Apache 2.0, that every runtime we count can load. The projector is bigger than the language model, so plan for about 2 GB. The card says nothing about limits or training data and doesn't show how a tool call comes back.

Before you call either

Granite 4.2 3B

  1. Start it with ollama run granite4.2:3b; set options.num_ctx in the request, since Ollama's default context is short and the model takes up to 131,072
  2. With vLLM 0.32.0 or later, serve ibm-granite/granite-4.2-3b with --reasoning-parser granite_thinking_parser --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder --enable-auto-tool-choice; that release has the parser built in, so the card's --reasoning-parser-plugin ./granite_thinking_parser.py isn't needed
  3. With SGLang 0.5.18 or later, --reasoning-parser auto --tool-call-parser auto resolve to IBM's recommended parsers, and the reasoning comes back in reasoning_content
  4. Use temperature 1.0 and top_p 0.95 for every mode, as IBM requires
  5. Pass enable_thinking false for direct answers or low_effort true for short reasoning, through chat_template_kwargs on an OpenAI-compatible server
  6. Earlier turns' thinking is stripped by default (truncate_history_thinking), so pass it false to keep reasoning in multi-turn history
  7. For JSON, use the runtime's guided decoding, since IBM documents no JSON mode for 4.2
  8. Verify the files with python -m model_signing verify sigstore and IBM's identity, per IBM's signature guide

MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B

  1. Start it with llama-server -hf openbmb/MiniCPM-V-4.7-1B-gguf:Q4_K_M --jinja, or ollama run openbmb/minicpm-v4.7:1b
  2. For image input in llama.cpp add mmproj-model-f16.gguf, or the smaller 4x projector
  3. The GGUF files at the repository root have thinking off. Use the files in thinking/ when you want the trace
  4. Use temperature 0.7, top_p 0.95 and top_k 100 in instruct mode, as the card recommends
  5. Check tool calls in your runtime first, since the card names no parser
  6. Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Granite 4.2 3B or MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B?

MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Granite 4.2 3B's 59.8 (C), and leads in 0 of 4 scored categories. Granite 4.2 3B leads on agent interface and documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with Granite 4.2 3B or MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.